Here is goes...ping.
Today, the WSJ Editorial Board denied Econ 101.
They said increased supply (of illegal labor) does not lead to reduced prices (wages for labor).
“You would think that a paper like The Wall Street Journal would call for a clarification,” Trump said. “But they don’t do that. They just write. That’s why they’re not a respected paper too much anymore.”
Yup, he nailed it. I’m encouraged every time one of the Republican candidates calls out the MSM to remind the public how dishonest and agenda driven they are.
China has been coming through the back door for 30 years, so why would one not suppose it would be the case with TPP? Rand was technically correct for this point in time, but Donald sees the future. And China IS a currency manipulator.
WSJ owned by Rupert Murdoch
Fox News Corp Owned by Rupert Murdoch
Tuesdays Debate Moderators all employed by Rupert Murdoch’s corporation
Equals fair and balanced journalism since they have shown a disdain for MrTrump from the git go? I don’t think so...
Freegards
LEX
Truth--as well as he can recognize it--is his guide, and let the chips fall where they may. That's leadership, and that's what America needs.
The WSJ is the propaganda arm of the Chamber of Amnesty. They have been GOPe forever and can’t believe their death grip on the nomination process is being threatened this time around. Trump can be comforted by the fact that this pompous club did not support Reagan in ‘76 either.
Looks more like Jeb’s boys picked a fight with the Donald. Of course the source is the ever truthful Polutico!
Our ‘precious’ media, GOPe, and talking heads are not used to this treatment, after all they are the ‘protected’ hero's from the establishment and how dare someone come along and make them a ‘mockery’ of the scum they are....
Trump pi$$es off all the right people.
I am pleased.
They must now attack in the face of a counter-attack.
You do not win battles by running away, although you can flank to win if you don’t win face-to-face.
got your back Donald!
'Amid the fireworks and picnics as this nation celebrates its independence tomorrow, we hope Americans stop to ask, what is the United States? The question is especially appropriate at this moment in the history of a nation of immigrants; upon returning from its July 4 recess Congress will try to finish work on the Simpson-Mazzoli bill.
The answer to the question is in the first words of our Constitution, "We, the people." It was the people, and especially new people, who worked this land into a New World. We hope today's gentlepeople, the descendants of the tired and poor who sought refuge on these shores, can still spare a thought for today's huddled masses, yearning to be free.
Simpson-Mazzoli, we are repeatedly told, is a carefully crafted compromise. It is in fact an anti-immigration bill. Note well that despite its grant of amnesty for aliens who have been residents long enough, its most outspoken opponents are the Hispanics, who would prefer to live with the present laws. Its constituency is an interesting and perhaps portentous alliance of the "nativist" Americans who still dominate Mountain States politics and the "Club of Rome" elitists of the Boston-Washington corridor.
We can hope that the bill will die in the House-Senate conference, which still must resolve such contentious differences as whether or not to have a program of temporary guest workers for agriculture. If it survives conference, President Reagan would be wise to veto it as antithetical to the national self-confidence his administration has done so much to renew.
If Washington still wants to "do something" about immigration, we propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders. Perhaps this policy is overly ambitious in today's world, but the U.S. became the world's envy by trumpeting precisely this kind of heresy. Our greatest heresy is that we believe in people as the great resource of our land. Those who would live in freedom have voted over the centuries with their feet. Wherever the state abused its people, beginning with the Puritan pilgrims and continuing today in places like Ho Chi Minh City and Managua, they've aimed for our shores. They -- we -- have astonished the world with the country's success.
The nativist patriots scream for "control of the borders." It is nonsense to believe that this unenforceable legislation will provide any such thing. Does anyone want to "control the borders" at the moral expense of a 2,000-mile Berlin Wall with minefields, dogs and machine-gun towers? Those who mouth this slogan forget what America means. They want those of us already safely ensconced to erect giant signs warning: Keep Out, Private Property.
The instinct is seconded by the "zero-sum" mentality that has been intellectually faddish this past decade. More people, the worry runs, will lead to overcrowding; will use up all our "resources," and will cause unemployment. Trembling no-growthers cry that we'll never "feed," "house" or "clothe" all the immigrants -- though the immigrants want to feed, house and clothe themselves. In fact, people are the great resource, and so long as we keep our economy free, more people means more growth, the more the merrier. Somehow the Reagan administration at least momentarily adopted the cramped Club-of-Rome vision, forgetting which side of this debate it is supposed to support. Ronald Reagan, we thought, marched to different bywords -- "growth," for example, and "opportunity."
If anyone doubts that the immigration and growth issue touches the fundamental character of a nation, he should look to recent experience in Europe. Some European governments are taken in by the no-growth nonsense that economic pies no longer grow, and must be sliced. They are actually paying immigrants and guest workers to go home: the Germans pay Turks, the French pay North Africans, the British pay West Indians and Asians. It was this dour view of people as liabilities, not assets, that led to the great European emigration to the U.S. in the first place. Meanwhile, Europe today settles into long-term unemployment for millions while the U.S. economy is booming with new jobs.
The same underlying difference in vision applies in political ideals. The individual is the lightning rod of 20th-century politics. The totalitarians of the Communist Bloc don't allow their people to leave. The foremost use of the machinery of the state is to wall in the citizens. If we cannot change their regimes, the least we can do is to offer refuge to those of their peoples with the opportunity and courage to arrive here. To do otherwise is to say that the ideals upon which this Republic was founded are spent, that what is left is to negotiate the terms of surrender.
America, above all, is a nation founded upon optimism. The Republic will prosper so long as it does not disavow this taproot. The issue is not what we offer the teeming masses, but what they offer us: their hands, their minds, their spirit, and above all the chance to be true to our own past and our own future.'
Open Nafta Borders? Why Not?
In Praise of Huddled Masses (Cont'd) Sadly, that's true.
So much corruption in the World that it is getting hard to pick one out to expose. America sure was in the middle and what do we expect when most politicians in Washington are criminals.
The story behind the scenes on this has to be fascinating.
Notice that Cruz is silent on the TPP controversy.
He’s not against it, and he was for the TPA, voting for it and campaigning for it for MONTHS.
When his vote was no longer needed for the final passage, he switched his support and voted against the final TPA bill.
His Goldman Sachs/Council on Foreign Relations wife is happy. She got the TPA and the TPP is guaranteed to not be stopped.
Cruz can’t care less about what he’s wrought.
Is there a link to this article? I don’t really want to subscribe to the rag just to see what they actually wrote.
The TPP is full of environmental and labor regs. that anyone joining would have to live up to. Why wouldn't we want China to have to live up to our standards?